[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
This is my concern too, I know that there is perhaps a market for Linux and open source in Lugs but not a volume market as yet, same goes for students, who may perhaps be doing computer courses that require Linux, however if you are doing a computer course at uni then you should really be able to sit down and install it your self. The support HAS to be there, I don't think kevin has that much (if any) experience with Linux, he has tried to install it but has failed. I said that if his target market is games then they should stick with windows, (wine / winex / cedega are still alpha), however if a user wants a computer for office type work then Linux should not be a problem, however this box may not be the right solution, given printer compatabiliyt and most people know someone who can fix windows. If they want a fully working Linux type system that is hardware supported go for OSX (DUCKS), He said he does not want to bother with the command line, or complex configs (this is where i get unstuck as I use the command line when needed), I think what he is expecting is a Linux box to work in exactly the same way as Windows, which is when he asks me the advantages of Linux what ever I say because he knows how to set windows up properly, then he does not have problems with crashes. I don't see a problem with running the xf86config script to get X working properly. I should not have to, but i just do it. IOW, Windows is so complex you need an MCSE to set it up properly. I think what is also confusing people is tht Linux is the kernel, so say mandrake xxx is Linux, so when a application crashes they blame the kernel not the software that sits on top, same as with dos a program may crash but it's the program not commadn com (and related) that have crashed. This needs addressing by the whole Linux community which is why I am behind the renaming the LUG to GLUG, so it distinguishes the kernel, from software and for the most part we don't actually discuss the kernel. I think the dual boot options are better but the idea of these systems is a produced Linux box without windows. hence the saving in money, which I don't think is going to work in the way he wants. again they need to supply decent manuals, I would prefer to pay the same price for a system with or without windows and the money saved on windows can get me around 512 mb of memory, extra. To me Linux IS easy to use, most of the problems I can use my past experience and knowledge to fix, to the point where i do it automatically and don't see it from a point of view of someone who has never used computers before. who will just say it's broken. Thanks for the advice, I agree they will get frustrated, perhaps this is not the best route, if you are going to sell Linux systems aim them at people who want them. Paul Simon Avery <flash@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote :
paul sutton wrote:Just had a chat with Kevin at Farseer, He wants to sell a line of PC's running Linux so they are cheaper than the windows boxes he sells. One of the problems is that not just Linux users are going to buy them. Because they are cheaper, any user will go for them simply because they are cheaper.Then I think he's going to get an awful lot of support questions, like "Why won't this game I bought install?" and "MS Office won't run, help!" IME, most PC users can just about distinguish between PC's and Macintoshes (because Mac software isn't sold in most shops) - but will just get frustrated and angry if they're sold something that most people haven't heard about. Hope I'm wrong. -- Simon Avery -- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG Mail majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxx with "unsubscribe list" in the message body to unsubscribe.
-- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG Mail majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxx with "unsubscribe list" in the message body to unsubscribe.